Today, the Israeli occupation army committed a new massacre in Gaza, causing the death and injury of hundreds of Palestinian civilians, including a yet unknown number of school children who were headed home from school when the first Israeli military strikes started. This latest bloodbath, although far more ruthless than all its predecessors, is not Israel's first. It culminates months of an Israeli siege of Gaza that should be widely condemned and prosecuted as an act of genocide against the 1.5 million Palestinians in the occupied coastal strip.

Israel seems intent to mark the end of its 60th year of existence the same way it has established itself -- perpetrating massacres against the Palestinian people. In 1948, the majority of the indigenous Palestinian people were ethnically cleansed from their homes and land, partly through massacres like Deir Yassin; today, the Palestinians in Gaza, most of whom are refugees, do not even have the choice to seek refuge elsewhere. Incarcerated behind ghetto walls and brought to the brink of starvation by the siege, they are easy targets for Israel's indiscriminate bombing.

Prof. Richard Falk, the UN Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and international law expert at Princeton University, described Israel's siege of Gaza last year, when it was still not comparable in its severity to the current situation, as follows:

"Is it an irresponsible overstatement to associate the treatment of Palestinians with this criminalized Nazi record of collective atrocity? I think not. The recent developments in Gaza are especially disturbing because they express so vividly a deliberate intention on the part of Israel and its allies to subject an entire human community to life-endangering conditions of utmost cruelty. The suggestion that this pattern of conduct is a holocaust-in-the-making represents a rather desperate appeal to the governments of the world and to international public opinion to act urgently to prevent these current genocidal tendencies from culminating in a collective tragedy."

The most brutal episode of this "collective tragedy" is what we have seen today.

Israel's war crimes and other grave violations of international law in Gaza as well as in the rest of the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, could not have been perpetrated without the direct or indirect complicity of world governments, particularly the United States, the European Union, Egypt, and other Arab regimes.

While the US government has consistently sponsored, bankrolled and protected from international censure Israel's apartheid and colonial policies against the indigenous people of Palestine, the EU was able in the past to advocate a semblance of respect for international law and universal human rights. That distinction effectively ended on 9 December, when the EU Council decided unanimously to reward Israel's criminal disregard of international law by upgrading the EU-Israel Association Agreement. Israel clearly understood from this decision that the EU condones its actions against the Palestinians under its occupation. Palestinian civil society also got the message: the EU governments have become no less complicit in Israel's war crimes than their US counterpart.

The large majority of world governments, particularly in the global south, share part of the blame, as well. By continuing business as usual with Israel, in trade agreements, arms deals, academic and cultural ties, diplomatic openings, they have provided the necessary background for the complicity of world powers and, consequentially, for Israel's impunity. Furthermore, their inaction within the United Nations is inexcusable.

Father Miguel D'Escoto Brockman, President of the UN General Assembly prescribed in a recent address before the Assembly the only moral way forward for the world's nations in dealing with Israel:

"More than 20 years ago we in the United Nations took the lead from civil society when we agreed that sanctions were required to provide a nonviolent means of pressuring South Africa to end its violations. Today, perhaps we in the United Nations should consider following the lead of a new generation of civil society, who are calling for a similar nonviolent campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions to pressure Israel to end its violations."

Now, more than ever, the Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions National Committee, BNC, calls upon international civil society not just to protest and condemn in diverse forms Israel's massacre in Gaza, but also to join and intensify the international Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel to end its impunity and to hold it accountable for its persistent violation of international law and Palestinian rights. Without sustained, effective pressure by people of conscience the world over, Israel will continue with its gradual, rolling acts of genocide against the Palestinians, burying any prospects for a just peace under the blood and rubble of Gaza, Nablus and Jerusalem.

Toronto -- CUPE Ontario's president yesterday said a Nazi reference he used to justify criticism of Israel was "a poor choice of analogy," after a trustee with the Toronto District School Board condemned such references in calling on his board to disavow the union's proposal to ban Israeli academics from the province's post-secondary schools.

"The example I gave was inappropriate and left people with the impression I was trying to compare the people of Israel with the Nazis," said Sid Ryan yesterday.

On Monday Mr. Ryan likened Israel's attack on the Islamic University in Gaza to Nazis targeting educational institutions and burning books in the Second World War. These comments, and similar statements in subsequent media interviews, were met with widespread scrutiny.

However, in an interview with the National Post yesterday evening, Mr. Ryan said he would apologize to "any member of the Jewish community or Israelis who I've offended ... and I know I've offended some people."

Yes, he can apologize as he killed no one. So, back to the sanctions against Israel ....

You know, it occured to me that last year the Canadian government of Stephen Harper, the one cheering on Israel's murderous rampage through the Palestinian ghetto it created, introduced what it described as the world's "toughest" sanctions against Burma. And you know what? Not a single troll or other poster came on babble to denounce those sanctions nor to complain that Burma was being singled out. Oddly, the same trolls and usual suspects also never criticize sanctions against Cuba by the US as being unfair, racist, and singling out a single state and when was the last time there was an academic exchange between a US university and a Cuban university? Sven? Any idea?

As I said, I think some of those opposed to sanctions are principled in their opposition. I think those that cry "racism" are themselves racist as they are really only interested in defended the racist and cruel occupation and on-going rampage of murder.

Yeah, it's much worse to make a Nazi analogy (something I understand is quite common in Israeli political rhetoric) than it is to support mass slaughter. I mean, heck, the JDL does both (supports mass slaughter of Palestinians AND makes Nazi analogies) but that's okay, right OO?

Any sanction that makes life as uncomfortable for the Israelies as the Israelies make if for the Palestinians seems fair to me at this stage. The trouble is how do we get our politicians to support any kind of sanctions. Any wedge issues that might work to split the political unity on the brutalization of the Palestinians?

I wouldn't support economic sanctions. Having been to several countries that have been on the receiving end of punishing UN sponsored sanctions initiated by western powers, I've witnessed how extreme and tragic it's deprivations can become. Sanctions mostly hurt the people at the bottom of the food chain, and in the case of Israel, it is the occupied people that would suffer the most, far more than they are now. Israel will see to that through revenge. They would close off everything to the Palestinians. Diplomatic, an end to military support, and foreign asset freezes would be far more effective at aiming toward the leadership.

Uhm, they're already doing that without any sanctions. I remember the same argument being made about South Africa but it was the oppressed of South Africa, themselves, who supported sanctions. When people have suffered so, so much, a little more at the hands of friends isn't such a bad thing if it can open the light at the end of the tunnel.

"Can't do anything about the politicians. Have to work up through the professional organizations, unions and such to build momentum."

You could be right with respect to our politicians, they get seasick when their boat rocks a bit in the swell. But I am not sure if one gets far with your suggestions. But you know Israel better then I do. How would it hurt them?

It would be nice if we could get China involved in forcing a solution. They are looking for world recognition and they could make the whole house of cards come tumbling down by getting rid of their American currency. And with the current downward trend in the American economy and the probably huge inflation that could result from the extreme spending increase why hang on to the US dollar when they could demand to be payed in their own currency.

And with the US in the dump Israel will follow in short order. China might not feel quiet ready for that, but it will not be that much longer in my opinion. Their gun boats are practicing on the Somali coast already. How history repeats itself.

Cueball, you brought up the example of South Africa repeatedly by stating that during Apatheid, all SA sports players, whether playing individualy or as representatives of SA, were banned.

However the wiki link in the following seems to differ with that view. According to this link, South African individual players (such as Golfers, tennis players etc) continued participating in international competitions. They were banned only where they participated as South African national team:

Palestinians in Gaza are already economically sanctioned. What is the difference?

The worsening of their situation, if that can be imagined, both in Gaza and the West Bank. If Israeli's suffer as a result of economic sanctions, they have already proven time and time again they are capable and quite willing to bring down devastating catastrophy upon the defenceless for far less provocation. If products become scarce in Israeli markets, they will see to it that Palestinian markets are barren. They care nothing about malnourished Gazans unless the act of allowing a few token truckloads of food can help the propaganda effort. If they are forced into a corner through international economic sanctions, the Palestinians would suffer even more than they are now as a result.

Of course you are correct, Sanizadeh, and I can recall that every effort to bar professional SA athletes was met with the same howls of outrage by the same sectors that opposed any sanctions and who now oppose any sanctions against Israel. But, again, these are people who can turn a blind eye to any suffering in the interests of dollars, race, or even an hour of entertainment. It's too bad we can send them and their families to live as Palestinians for a while. It would be interesting to see if their views would change. I read today an entire family of 60 people was wiped out by the Israelis ... in self-defence I'm sure.

Slumberjack, your concern is touching, but the fact remains that it is the mass civil organizations of the Palestinians themselves that have demanded boycott action. Solidarity suggests that we bow to their wishes, rather than applying our superior intellect to say, "Oh, you may think you want that, but trust us, we know better."

Please look at the highlighted or italicized sections below. I'm sure you will see that ALL OF PALESTINE is asking for these economic and other sanctions. You and I should respect their plea.

Quote:

Palestinian Civil
Society
Calls for Boycott,
Divestment and Sanctions against Israel
Until it Complies
with International Law and Universal Principles of Human Rights

9
July 2005

One year after the historic Advisory Opinion of the
International Court of Justice (ICJ) which found Israel’s Wall built
on occupied Palestinian territory to be illegal, Israel continues its
construction of the colonial Wall with total disregard to the Court’s
decision. Thirty eight years into Israel’s occupation of the
Palestinian West Bank (including East Jerusalem), Gaza Strip and the
Syrian Golan Heights, Israel continues to expand Jewish colonies. It
has unilaterally annexed occupied East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights
and is now de facto annexing large parts of the West Bank by means of
the Wall. Israel is also preparing - in the shadow of its planned
redeployment from the Gaza Strip - to build and expand colonies in the
West Bank. Fifty seven years after the state of Israel was built
mainly on land ethnically cleansed of its Palestinian owners, a
majority of Palestinians are refugees, most of whom are stateless.
Moreover, Israel's entrenched system of racial discrimination against
its own Arab-Palestinian citizens remains intact.

In light
of Israel’s persistent violations of international law, and Given
that, since 1948, hundreds of UN resolutions have condemned Israel’s
colonial and discriminatory policies as illegal and called for
immediate, adequate and effective remedies, and

Given
that all forms of international intervention and peace-making have
until now failed to convince or force Israel to comply with
humanitarian law, to respect fundamental human rights and to end its
occupation and oppression of the people of Palestine, and

In view
of the fact that people of conscience in the international community
have historically shouldered the moral responsibility to fight
injustice, as exemplified in the struggle to abolish apartheid in
South Africa through diverse forms of boycott, divestment and
sanctions;

Inspired
by the struggle of South Africans against apartheid and in the spirit
of international solidarity, moral consistency and resistance to
injustice and oppression,

We,
representatives of Palestinian civil society, call upon international
civil society organizations and people of conscience all over the
world to impose broad boycotts and implement divestment initiatives
against Israel similar to those applied to South Africa in the
apartheid era. We appeal to you to pressure your respective states to
impose embargoes and sanctions against Israel. We also invite
conscientious Israelis to support this Call, for the sake of justice
and genuine peace.

These
non-violent punitive measures should be maintained until Israel meets
its obligation to recognize the Palestinian people’s inalienable right
to self-determination and fully complies with the precepts of
international law by:

1. Ending
its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the
Wall;

2.
Recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of
Israel to full equality; and

3.
Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian
refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN
resolution 194.

Endorsed by:

The
Palestinian political parties, unions, associations, coalitions and
organizations below represent the three integral parts of the people
of Palestine: Palestinian refugees, Palestinians under occupation and
Palestinian citizens of Israel.

UNIONS, ASSOCIATIONS, CAMPAIGNS

1. Council of National and
Islamic Forces in Palestine
(coordinating body for the major political parties in the Occupied
Palestinian Territory)

Recently, Israeli academics have
toured the UK to dissuade British academics from supporting a boycott
against Israeli academic institutions. The Israelis have made two
arguments against the boycott, both of which are seriously flawed. The
first, as reported by the Israeli media, is that the boycott "defies
the universal principle of academic freedom" and would hurt Israeli
academics. The second, variants of which are routinely presented by
apologists for Israel, is that Israeli academics are in the vanguard of
dissent and are crucial forces for change; the boycott will only weaken
them and thus is counterproductive. Such claims are at best
disingenuous.

As a Palestinian academic, I find the argument
about academic freedom insensitive and offensive. Do Palestinian
universities somehow fall outside the remit of the "universal"
principle of academic freedom? The Israeli academics who argue for
their unfettered access to international academic networks, grants,
visiting professorships, fellowships and other benefits of the academic
system, have paid scant attention to the total denial of the most basic
freedoms to Palestinians, academics or otherwise. No association of
university professors, academic senate, or professional body in Israel
has ever protested the grotesque occupation, which destroys the lives
and jeopardises the future of our students and faculties.

Aside
from a courageous few, the vast majority of Israeli academics have been
resoundingly silent when our universities have been shut by military
orders, our access to them obstructed by concrete walls and barriers,
and thousands of our students and colleagues jailed for resisting an
unjust and internationally condemned occupation. In the Israeli
academy, business as usual grinds on everywhere, and academics, in a
startling show of insensitivity to their Palestinian counterparts,
demand their right to enjoy the benefits and privileges of academic
freedom without shouldering any of the responsibilities that come with
freedom.

The privileging of "academic freedom" above other, more
basic, liberties flies in the face of the idea of universal human
rights. How can the academic freedom of a sector of Israeli society be
more important than the basic right to a free and dignified life for
all Palestinians, academics included? There is more than a whiff of
racism in the assumption that the academic privilege of Israeli
academics is more valuable than the freedom of an entire people being
strangled by an illegal occupation...

However, ATU's resolve to move foreward with an academic boycott was thwarted by a legal opinion.

Quote:

Israel hails end of UK academics' boycott threat

September 30, 2007 - AFP

Israel welcomed Saturday
a decision by Britain's main academics' trade union to end a threatened
boycott of Israeli universities, following legal advice that it would
be unlawful.

"It's a positive decision that shows that extremists who want to
impose an anti-Israeli agenda will fail, when it's not just a small
group, but a broad section of opinion that is concerned," said foreign
ministry spokesman Mark Regev.

"It's important news for Israeli universities as it shows that
joint efforts can counter cynical maneuvers aimed at undermining the
international legitimacy of Israel."...

"It would be beyond the union's
powers and unlawful for the union, directly or indirectly, to call for,
or to implement, a boycott ... of any kind of Israeli universities and
other academic institutions," said the legal advice...

I don't understand how a boycott would be considered unlawful. I remember CUPE following ATU's lead without concern about it being an unlawful action.

Anyway, it seems to me that our politicians and media are not going to advance any meaningful protest against Israel's occupation of Palestine or their brutalization of Palestinians. It will be up to NGOs and unions to keep up the fight much like it was in the fight to liberate East Timor from occupation. I support any move that furthers that agenda.

And which confirms our obligation internationally, as allies of the Palestinian people's quest for emancipation, not to second-guess their requests for aid but come forward and help in any way they request.

Palestinians in Gaza are already economically sanctioned. What is the difference?

The worsening of their situation, if that can be imagined, both in Gaza and the West Bank. If Israeli's suffer as a result of economic sanctions, they have already proven time and time again they are capable and quite willing to bring down devastating catastrophy upon the defenceless for far less provocation. If products become scarce in Israeli markets, they will see to it that Palestinian markets are barren. They care nothing about malnourished Gazans unless the act of allowing a few token truckloads of food can help the propaganda effort. If they are forced into a corner through international economic sanctions, the Palestinians would suffer even more than they are now as a result.

I guess what you are not getting here is that Israel has actively pursued a program of eliminating Palestinians from the core of the Israeli economy. Previous to 2000, Palestinians played a fundamental role in the Israeli economy, much the same as Black South Africans did. They did the manual labour, the cleaning, and other kinds of semi-skilled labour.

However, the program since 2000 has been to elminate the Palestinian from the economy and isolate them in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Enter the seperation wall, and hieghtened restrictions for Palestinians entering Jerusalem, where they could be part of the labour market.

This cheap labour force has systematically been replaced by foreign "guest workers" from around the world, and the explicit intention is to make the Israeli economy "Palestinian Free". This means a few things. For one thing it means that labour strikes and other kinds of peaceful actions are not actually effective, since of course non-Isreali Arabs no longer work in Israel.

Another thing it has done is cast the Palestinian society into deep poverty, where they are increasingly dependent on international aid. The situation in the West Bank is better, but in fact the Gaza Strip has basically been under economic embargo for the last two years, even from the international aid,

Sanctions and boycotts against Israel, would do little to the Palestinian economy, as Israel has already sanctioned it by boycotting Palestinian labour. The Palestinians have nothing to lose, and almost everything to gain from a boycott, which is why the measure is supported by almost every Palestinian activist group on the planet.

There were 110,000 Palestinians working in Israel before the uprisings that began in December 1987, and 70,000 Palestinians held work permits before the border closure in October 1994. Israel has increased the quota on guestworkers from countries such as Romania and Thailand, and announced that the PLO and Israel would eventually work out an agreement to reduce the dependence of Palestinians on the Israeli labor market.

Gotta like that. The Israeli government spins depriving Palestinians of the right to work in their own lands as reducing the "dependence of Palestinians on the Israeli labor market".

Beautiful.

Quote:

The results of the study indicate that the earnings of Palestinians aresignificantly reduced by the presence of foreign workers in Israel. Estimated rates of substitution between Palestinians from Gaza and foreign workers are more than ten timesthe rates of substitution estimated for Palestinians from the West Bank. Palestinians from Gaza also experience a decrease in mean monthly wage earnings that is more than fivetimes greater than their counterparts that reside in the West Bank.

I do not recall Sid Ryan and other members of CUPE's Ontario University Workers Co-ordinating Committee proposing bans on:

-Palestinian academics from the Islamic University in Gaza who have not publicly disassociated themselves from their elected Hamascontrolled government's policy of firing over 10,000 rockets into Israel (specifically targeting civilian population);

-Lebanese academics who have not publicly disassociated themselves from the Hezbollah (who were members of the elected Lebanese government until 2006) policy of repeatedly firing rockets into northern Israel.

-Iranian academics who have not publicly disassociated themselves from their elected government's policy of denying Israel's right to exist, questioning the Holocaust and subsidizing terrorist organizations around the world.

Somehow, Mr. Ryan and his CUPE colleagues manage to selectively pick on the members of a single ethnic group in their proposed boycotts. There is a name for people practising such selective treatments, and there are regulations in Canada designed to deal with them. I do not think Sid Ryan should be allowed to speak at any publicly funded university in Ontario.

I'd like to address one particular defence put forward by supporters of the proposed academic boycott of Israel who I think are ducking the question of why Israel is being singled out and why not apply the same standards toa cademics from otehr countries that engage in human rights violations (including my country of citizenship and the country that employs me).

The argument that the fact that we're not boycotting EVERY country doesn't mean we shouldn't fight injustice perpetrated by ONE of them. I fully recognize the folly of the logic that "if you can't solve EVERY problem, don't bother trying to solve ANY." However, that simply doesn't apply to this situation and is a complete red herring.

There are things that we can do to affect change that are difficult and costly and there are things that we do which are easy and don't cost a thing. The absurdity of the "if not ALL, then why any?" would apply in SOME situations, but not this one. The fact that I can't afford to give a generous donation to support cancer research AND AIDS research AND heart disease research AND diabetes research shouldn't stop me from making a donation to support cancer research. The fact that I don't ahve time to volunteer at the food bank AND the homeless shelter AND the soup kitchen AND the senior's residence isn't an excuse not to volunteer at the food bank.

But the action proposed by CUPE takes no effort and costs nothing. It literally costs nothing because everyone, CIPE included, knows it will never actually be implemented. It is purely symbolic. So if you're going to take a purely symbolic action - and an easy and cost-free one - why not add other countries to the boycott list? What does it really take for CUPE to do this? 2 extra minutes of typing and an extra sheet of paper (sadly the list of human rights violators is a lengthy one). THIS is the reason that people think israel is being treated unfairly and ahve come to question teh motivations of those behind the proposal.

We wouldn't stand for this in other areas. I imagine, for example, that some people of Italian descent steal cars. People of Italian descent are certainly far from the ONLY group that steals cars. An Italian guy stealing a car isn't inherently morally worse than a Swedish guy or Mexican guy or Japanese guy or Dutch guy stealing a car. It doesn't take any extra effort on my part to condemn ALL car thiefs than it does to condemn ITALIAN ones. So, if I were to put out a public statement specifically condemning "Italian car thiefs", would it maybe be reasonable to suggest that I was treating italians unfairly? Could one plausibly suggest that I may harbour some sort of bigotry towards italians?

And which confirms our obligation internationally, as allies of the Palestinian people's quest for emancipation, not to second-guess their requests for aid but come forward and help in any way they request.

Isn't it ironic though, apart from individual divestment, that this can only be effectively achieved through the one of the primary vehicles for international white supremacy, the UN security council. I believe you've mentioned something about the white man's burden on occasion. But then, who are we to second guess a process that has been called for by the emancipated themselves.

And which confirms our obligation internationally, as allies of the Palestinian people's quest for emancipation, not to second-guess their requests for aid but come forward and help in any way they request.

Isn't it ironic though, apart from individual divestment, that this can only be effectively achieved through the one of the primary vehicles for international white supremacy, the UN security council. I believe you've mentioned something about the white man's burden on occasion. But then, who are we to second guess a process that has been called for by the emancipated themselves.

Well of course. And it is precisely this institution, which is primarily responsible for this situation, so I see no reason why they should not take responsibility for it.

Comments and ideas are welcome as to how Canadians can support this international movement.

Intel's most recent microprocessor achievement, the Core i7 architecture, is produced at the factory in Israel. The product is called "Nehalem". I doubt that boycotting that product line will make an impact, but it is an idea.

As far as alternatives - AMD has recently introduced their second-generation quad core, and it keeps up with the Intel products.

Any boycott is apt to have innocent victims. In particular, it is said that boycotting Israeli academic institutions would unjustly punish intellectuals who are for peace. Perhaps, but Israel itself readily admits that there are innocent victims in Gaza, whose innocence in no way prevents them from being killed. We do not propose killing anyone. A boycott is a perfectly non-violent act by citizens. It is comparable to conscientious objection or civil disobedience in the face of unjust power. Israel flouts all UN resolutions and our own governments, far from taking measures to oblige Israel to comply, merely reinforce their ties with Israel. We have the right, as citizens, to demand that our own governments respect international law.

What is important about sanctions, especially on the cultural level, is their symbolic value. It is a way of telling our governments that we do not accept their policy of collaboration with a state that has chosen to become an international outlaw.

Some object to a boycott on the grounds that it is opposed by both some progressive Israelis and a certain number of "moderate" Palestinians (but not Palestinian civil society as a whole). But the main question for us is not what they say, but what foreign policy we want for our own countries. The Israeli-Arab conflict is far from being a mere local quarrel and has attained a worldwide significance. It involves the basic issue of respect for international law. A boycott should be defended as a means to protest to our governments in order to force them to change their policy. We have the right to want to be able to travel without shame in the rest of the world. That is reason enough to encourage a boycott.

And which confirms our obligation internationally, as allies of the Palestinian people's quest for emancipation, not to second-guess their requests for aid but come forward and help in any way they request.

Isn't it ironic though, apart from individual divestment, that this can only be effectively achieved through the one of the primary vehicles for international white supremacy, the UN security council.

I don't understand why that should be the case. The Commonwealth played a very effective role (surprisingly) once it began ostracizing the South African apartheid regime. Individual countries can play a very significant role.

But you asked for a source where Palestinian civil society requests economic sanctions. Did you have a chance to review the document I cited?

I'd like to address one particular defence put forward by supporters of the proposed academic boycott of Israel who I think are ducking the question of why Israel is being singled out and why not apply the same standards toa cademics from otehr countries that engage in human rights violations (including my country of citizenship and the country that employs me).

The argument that the fact that we're not boycotting EVERY country doesn't mean we shouldn't fight injustice perpetrated by ONE of them. I fully recognize the folly of the logic that "if you can't solve EVERY problem, don't bother trying to solve ANY." However, that simply doesn't apply to this situation and is a complete red herring.

There are things that we can do to affect change that are difficult and costly and there are things that we do which are easy and don't cost a thing. The absurdity of the "if not ALL, then why any?" would apply in SOME situations, but not this one. The fact that I can't afford to give a generous donation to support cancer research AND AIDS research AND heart disease research AND diabetes research shouldn't stop me from making a donation to support cancer research. The fact that I don't ahve time to volunteer at the food bank AND the homeless shelter AND the soup kitchen AND the senior's residence isn't an excuse not to volunteer at the food bank.

But the action proposed by CUPE takes no effort and costs nothing. It literally costs nothing because everyone, CIPE included, knows it will never actually be implemented. It is purely symbolic. So if you're going to take a purely symbolic action - and an easy and cost-free one - why not add other countries to the boycott list? What does it really take for CUPE to do this? 2 extra minutes of typing and an extra sheet of paper (sadly the list of human rights violators is a lengthy one). THIS is the reason that people think israel is being treated unfairly and ahve come to question teh motivations of those behind the proposal.

We wouldn't stand for this in other areas. I imagine, for example, that some people of Italian descent steal cars. People of Italian descent are certainly far from the ONLY group that steals cars. An Italian guy stealing a car isn't inherently morally worse than a Swedish guy or Mexican guy or Japanese guy or Dutch guy stealing a car. It doesn't take any extra effort on my part to condemn ALL car thiefs than it does to condemn ITALIAN ones. So, if I were to put out a public statement specifically condemning "Italian car thiefs", would it maybe be reasonable to suggest that I was treating italians unfairly? Could one plausibly suggest that I may harbour some sort of bigotry towards italians?

That depends who stole your car.

Point being ... The issue of concern in this thread is the immediate bombardment and blockade of Palestinians by Israel, the immediate events and possible effective responses to stop the immediate atrocities ... by Israel.

"Ronnie Kasrils, a prominent South African politician, said that the
architecture of segregation that he saw in the West Bank and Gaza was
"infinitely worse than apartheid." That was in 2007, before Israel
began its full-scale war against the open-air prison that is Gaza."

Does anyone have any realistic suggestion as to how to tackle the two most lucrative sectors of Israel's economy (tourism and arms/technology), which would seem to be hard to crack?

Is there an effective campaign to challenge and refute the mainstream media figures who support Israel-right-or-wrong? (I mean demos, massive email campaigns, pickets)

Thinking of the Argentine "escrache": an effective tool to smoke out former torturers enjoying impunity in their homes and places of business - graffiti, spontaneous demo, pickets, lots of noise and publicity. Personalize the protest.

Re. boycott/sanctions hurting the weakest in a society: I believe that is the case (e.g., Cuba, Zimbabwe, South Africa), and I would support it with a heavy heart, but in this case it would always be a token gesture because the Diaspora will keep on pouring millions into Israel, so I wouldn't worry excessively about the little Israeli children suffering hunger and want from a boycott.

3. Why single out Israel when the United States, Britain and other Western countries do the same things in Iraq and Afghanistan? Boycott is not a dogma; it is a tactic. The reason the BDS strategy should be tried against Israel is practical: in a country so small and trade-dependent, it could actually work.

The Right Honourable Stephan HarperPrime Minister of CanadaOffice of the Prime Minister80 Wellington street.Ottawa, On K1A 0A2

Re: Middle East crisis

On behalf of the 56,000 members of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers, I am writing to demand that the Canadian government condemn the military assault on the people of Gaza that the state of Israel commenced on December 26th, 2008.

Canada must also call for a cessation of the ongoing Israeli siege of Gaza, which has resulted in the collective punishment of the entire Gaza population.

Canada must also address the root cause of the violence: Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories.

Israel's current actions are totally out of proportion with any notion of self-defense. Israel's actions are resulting in the massacre of people in Gaza.

Israel's action will not bring peace to the region. they will result in Israel being less secure.

Professor Richard Falk, the UN's Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in the Occupied territories, has characterized the Israeli offensive as containing "...severe and massive violations of international humanitarian law as defined in the Geneva Conventions, both in regards to the obligations of an occupying power and in the requirements of the laws of war."

CUPW strongly urges the Canadian government to condemn the serious violations of humanitarian and international law by the state of Israel.

The Israeli Government's siege and military incursions into Gaza are not isolated events. It is a direct result of Israel's ongoing occupation of Palestine and the refusal of the Israeli government to abide by numerous United Nations security council resolutions.

Therefore, as a longer term strategy, the Canadian Union of Postal Workers is asking your government to adopt a program of boycott, divestment and sanctions until Israel recognizes the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and complies with international law, including the rights of palestinian refugees to return to their homes as stipulated in UN resolution 194.

If Israeli's suffer as a result of economic sanctions, they have already proven time and time again they are capable and quite willing to bring down devastating catastrophy upon the defenceless for far less provocation.

There are also concerns that sales to the United States aren't tracked and that most Canadian-made military goods cross the border without requiring export permits, owing to an agreement between the two countries signed in the 1940s.

"I think there's a huge loophole in the export controls," said [Janice] Stein, of the University of Toronto. "The export licensing requirements for what we sell to the United States are so minimal that it is possible that if some of that equipment moves to third parties, we would never know."

Canada's biggest arms customer is the USA, and Israel is the USA's biggest arms customer. Undoubtedly there is a great deal of Canadian war materiel going to Israel via the USA, with no records or controls.

I think it's critical that a credible Canadian body come forward with a list for
Canadians to boycott effectively. Even those not actively involved may
stay away from those places if the word gets out strongly enough.

Is it time we organized a broad campaign to boycott, divest and sanction Israel?

...

Naomi Klein’s assessment resonates with many people who are terribly
upset by the injustice they see happening in Gaza. Now is the time that
we should collectively act to simultaneously reject consumerism and the
war in Gaza. Getting involved is easy:

Naomi Klein’s assessment resonates with many people who are terribly
upset by the injustice they see happening in Gaza. Now is the time that
we should collectively act to simultaneously reject consumerism and the
war in Gaza. Getting involved is easy:

Over 80 professors and employees at colleges and universities in Quebec have signed a petition calling for a comprehensive campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions, including a boycott of Israeli academic institutions. Below is the open letter that they have issued.

Quote:

We are a group of teachers and employees at Quebec colleges and universities who stand in solidarity with the Palestinian people, and with the people of Gaza who have suffered through the Israeli siege as targets of Israel's brutal military attack. It will take more than ceasefires to bring a just and lasting peace in Palestine and Israel. We are acting in response to an appeal for support issued January 2, 2009 by the Palestinian Federation of Unions of University Professors and Employees. In the wake of the Israeli bombing of the Islamic University of Gaza, the Federation of Unions has urged academics around the world to support a boycott of Israeli academic institutions.

We support this call and place it within a wider campaign of boycott, divestment, and sanctions. The struggle against apartheid in South Africa was supported through boycotts, divestment, and sanctions. We support a similar strategy against the Israeli state.

We will undertake actions within our own institutions to promote education on this issue, to support students, faculty, and employees to speak out on this question, and to pressure the institutions in which we work to participate in a boycott, divestment, and sanctions campaign that aims for a just and lasting settlement for the Palestinian people.

We strongly condemn the government of Canada's position on the ongoing conflict in Gaza and for its bilateral trade agreements that help sustain Israeli military actions. The Harper government has condemned Hamas, an elected government, as a terrorist organization. Yet it consistently supports the government of Israel, which has used weapons causing mass destruction on a mainly civilian population, including attacks on children and schools, and has violated International prohibitions against collective punishment through its blockade of the Gaza strip.

We call on the Harper government to re-evaluate its policies and to unequivocally condemn the Israeli siege and assault on Gaza, which constitute serious violations of international and humanitarian law. We further demand that the Israeli government immediately cease its violence.

As well, we urge that all economic relations between Israel and the governments of Canada and Quebec - including trade agreements - be suspended until there is not only a just and lasting peace for the Palestinian people, but that Israel, in compliance with international law, recognizes the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination.